Time for the Unthinkable: a Third-Party

Nelson Hultberg is a freelance writer in Dallas, Texas and the Director of Americans for a Free Republic www.afr.org. His articles have appeared in such publications as the Dallas Morning News, The American Conservative, Insight, The Freeman, and Liberty, as well as on numerous Internet sites such as The Daily Bell, Financial Sense, and Safe Haven. He is also the author of The Golden Mean: Libertarian Politics, Conservative Values. Email him at: nelshultberg@aol.com

In the aftermath of the sickening travesty that Obama's reelection represents, pundits on the right are building up their strategic juices to project how conservatives and libertarians can "take over the Republican Party" and begin taking the country back.

My answer to them is: It will never happen! Oh, we can take the country back, all right, but not through control of the GOP. The ideological sycophants that comprise the GOP couldn't take back a sack of sunflowers from spinsters in a rest home.

Far too many pundits on the right have ceased to think. Irrationality saturates their minds regarding how to confront the political leprosy that Obama represents. This is because they believe we must, now and forever, work within the statist establishment. This is grievously in error. The present political insanity in America mandates a new direction, a dramatic new strategy. Dare I say it? We need a THIRD-PARTY to provide an escape from the GOP's debilitating lack of chutzpah.

Conservatives desperately need to purge the me-too welfarists from their command centers. But tragically all we hear today from “respectable” voices on the right is the same me-too welfarism we've heard for over four decades about how the GOP must "become more inclusive" and "build a bigger tent." Translated, this means we need to shelve our principles in favor of more compromises with the leprosy of the liberals.

"But most important of all," say the respectable voices, "never are we to abandon the Republican Party for a Third-Party. That is a sure recipe for handing the country over to the liberals. We must always work within the two-party system.”

Actually the above Republican boilerplate is correct if one wants to preserve the present Demopublican system. But we at AMERICANS FOR A FREE REPUBLIC don't want to "preserve" the present system. We want to destroy it – for the same reason one wants to destroy smog and mendacity and slavery.

Today's political system is a corrupt monopoly, and it has to be broken. Thus the title of our book, Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly. But one cannot do this by joining the system and trying to reform it "from within." That's like trying to reform the Mafia by joining their organization and reasoning with them to give up their criminal ways. Their criminality is their livelihood, and they would no more abandon it than wolves would abandon the attacking of deer. The Mafia can only be fought from without. And likewise Demopublican statism can only be reformed from without.

Why "Reform from Within" Can Never Work

Numerous libertarian and conservative groups in America (e.g., the Republican Liberty Caucus, the John Birch Society, etc.) advocate “working within the system” and have been trying for the past 50 years to infiltrate the Republican Party with their visions so as to change its goals. Three or four new congressmen are elected every two years by the efforts of these and other right-wing advocacy groups, but unfortunately the overall number of libertarian and conservative legislators in the GOP never grows. This is because during that two years an equal amount of congressmen who came to Washington in favor of the freedom cause have slid into the "good ol' boys club" and have started voting for more and more spending schemes.

Why? Because our political system is corrupted by the progressive income tax system. This forces new, incoming libertarians and conservatives to almost always compromise with congressional liberals on spending policy. As fast as we send freedom advocates to Washington they are bought off. Here's why:

IRS statistics show that 50% of American citizens pay zero income taxes. This has led to what is called, in economic parlance, "infinite demand for government services." In other words, if services are free to large amounts of voters, they will want all they can get. This is basic human nature. So under our present tax system, 50% of the American voters want more government spending every election year. Add in the guilt-obsessed liberals in upper income classes, and you have a guaranteed 60% of the electorate pushing relentlessly for more spending every election year. Thus all politicians going to Washington conclude early on that they will never be reelected if they push for less government spending.

Therefore almost all libertarian and conservative politicians end up crossing the aisle and voting with the Democrats to boost government spending every year. They know they have to in order to be reelected. This is why all advocates of "working within the system" have never made any headway in slowing the runaway freight train of government growth. The system is corrupted by the progressive income tax.

Solving the Tax Dilemma

The only way to end this dilemma is to end the income tax. This is the single most important goal of the 21st century – purging this tyrannical tool of statism from our land. Unfortunately it can’t be done overnight, but it can be done over the next decade if we are resourceful.

The first step toward abolition of the income tax is, of course, to generate in the people a strong desire to get rid of it. But we can’t do that as long as 50% of American voters are exempt from paying it. The majority of voters will continue to support this hated tax as long as it applies only to the upper 50% of income earners in the country as it presently does. Thus if we truly want to get rid of the income tax (rather than just protest about it), we need to first destroy its progressivity of rates. This is the only way to get a majority of voters to vote against it.

This means we must totally flatten our present progressive tax structure to a simple 10% equal-rate tax with no exemptions whatsoever. (Please keep in mind, such a flat tax is not our ultimate goal. It is merely a temporary expedient to bring about our ultimate goal of total abolition.)

The 50% of voters who presently don’t pay must be required to pay. This would immediately end the income tax’s popularity among all voters, and it would end the "infinite demand for government services" that progressive tax rates bring about. The 50% of the voters who presently pay zero income taxes for their services would very quickly lose their desire for more services if they had to pay for them out of their own pockets. This would bring about widspread demand for reduction of government services rather than their constant expansion. Most important of all it would create widespread demand to lower the rate of the tax every year. Millions of irresponsible voters would suddenly become quite responsible. They would begin demanding massive cuts in spending so that their tax rates could be cut from 10% to a more tolerable 5%. At this time the flat income tax could then be replaced with a national sales tax of about 8%. The IRS could then be ended. This could be done over the next decade or two.

(Please note: The present Fair Tax will never be salable to voters at today’s level of government spending because its rate is 23%. Total government spending must be reduced first, which only an equal-rate income tax can bring about.)

There will be many who disagree with such an incrementalist approach. “Why not just abolish the income tax right away,” they reply? Why do we have to go in stages to end this hated tax? Because the voters have to be induced to end the tax, which can only be done by requiring them to pay it. In addition no presidential candidate can be elected at this time by advocating total abolishment. Ron Paul is a perfect example. As noble as his cause was (and is), the voting public marginalized him because they feared him. They feared him because he spoke the truths of freedom in language that meant ending the welfare state overnight.

For example. The income tax presently takes in $2.1 trillion in annual revenue for the Federal Government. To end it immediately would mean ending $2.1 trillion in annual government services tomorrow, which is very scary to the voters. Yet a zero income tax as quickly as possible is what Ron Paul campaigned on, and it is one of the main reasons why he got only 12% of the vote. He scared too many of the voters.

This fear creation needs to be avoided for 2016. If a political reformer is to genuinely shake up the Demopublican system and end its despotic grip on our lives, then he needs to get into the national TV presidential debates like Ross Perot did in 1992 where he can stand on that stage and tell 70 million American voters how the Demopublican candidates are destroying the country via the income tax and the Federal Reserve. This cannot be done if our “freedom candidate” is marginalized by the people. And he will be marginalized if he speaks of abolishing the income tax overnight.

To gain entrance into the national TV presidential debates, our freedom candidate needs to get 15-20% in the polls. So we need to work smart instead of working emotionally. This means not scaring the American people into marginalizing us.

This also means that working within the Republican party and participating in the GOP nomination debates will never do the trick. The nomination debates only go out to about 10 million viewers on the cable channels. They are viewed primarily by political junkies. But the big debates in the fall between the Democratic and Republican candidates are viewed by 70 million viewers on the major networks. This is where the course of the country is decided. This is the big leagues. And if we are to save America, this is where we must take our stand. But this can only be done by a nationally known candidate running as an Independent. The GOP will never nominate a true “freedom candidate” who speaks of phasing out the income tax.

Would a phasing out of the income tax by eliminating progressive rates be salable to American voters? Yes, if it was explained properly to them. In our book, Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly, we show that a 10% equal-rate tax, when combined with a computerized 4% auto-expansion of the money supply for the Fed, would result in a minimum 16% annual increase in the standard of living for all American citizens. Thus the lower income classes who would have their taxes raised from zero to 10% would still net a 6% annual increase in their standard of living. What’s most important is that these two pillars of reform would light up the sky of productivity and wealth for everyone. They would bring back millions of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in investment capital to America.

Like the income tax, the Fed is not going to be eliminated overnight; Ron Paul concedes this. But the Fed can be phased out over the next decade or two. And the first step is to end the FOMC’s power to arbitrarily expand the money supply. We must force the Fed by law to keep money creation at the same rate as goods and services are growing; this would create zero percent price inflation annually. Milton Friedman’s 4% auto-expansion plan for the Fed would accomplish this. It would end the terrible debasement of our currency while we sell the voting public on the need to end the Fed totally over the next decade.

We at AFR call this reform of the tax and monetary systems the "Two Pillars Strategy." And we corroborate it with statistics from the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Federal Reserve Bank, and wise economists such as John Williams and James L. Payne. This demonstration could be simplified so it is understandable to 70 million voters who tune into the national TV presidential debates.

What Needs to Be Done

To bring this about the National Independent Party is being launched. But we are not just another third-party like the Libertarian and Constitution Parties. This is because we will not marginalize ourselves by advocating the immediate abolishment of the income tax and the Fed. Our “Two Pillars Strategy” is incremental; thus our candidate will not scare the voters and will easily get the crucial 15-20% in the polls to qualify for the national TV presidential debates where he can educate 70 million voters. This, neither the Libertarian nor Constitution Parties (with their 1% vote tallies) will ever be able to do. Consequently one should think of us as not just a political party, but as a dramatic gathering place for the patriots of America, a "gathering of eagles" that can alter the annals of history.

Here's a good way to view the National Independent Party: In the early 1770s, the patriots of Boston (led by Samuel Adams and John Hancock) were meeting in the local taverns every few weeks. But by 1772 their numbers had grown so strong that they overflowed the largest of taverns. Some other place had to be found to bring them all together. Adams and Hancock found that place; it was called the Old South Meeting House. It held up to 5,000 patriots, and this is where the American Revolution was launched. The Patriots met there from then on to plot their strategy, to invigorate their spirits, and to exchange ideas. As a result, the Old South Meeting House in Boston is today a famous landmark.

This, in essence, is what the National Independent Party (along with its website) will be. It will be the Old South Meeting House for the new patriots of today. And there's not just 5,000 of them out there that can be brought together. There's probably a million of them who would join the Party. What kind of money contributions would come from a million passionate patriots determined to end the insanity that is consuming America? It is not unrealistic to expect $50 million contributed to the cause of restoring freedom. Fifty million dollars would buy a lot of major advertising going into 2016. That would make our Gathering of Eagles a mighty powerful force for change in America.

Our most important goal for 2016 and beyond is to convince a major libertarian/conservative politician (such as Rand Paul, Allen West, Jim DeMint, etc.) to run an independent campaign and get into the national TV presidential debates where he can then educate 70 million voters about the crucial need for genuine tax and monetary reform to stop government growth. He can do this, like Ross Perot did in 1992, by giving 30-minute lectures on national TV the night before each of his three debates. How would this TV time be paid for? By the candidate's support groups and by the million patriots in the National Independent Party.

Such a campaign would be unbelievably dramatic. It would electrify the nation. It would break the Demopublican monopoly of ideas that is stultifying the system and destroying the greatest country in history. We believe that such a candidate could garner 38% of the vote and win in a three-man race, but even if he didn’t win the White House, he would act as a powerful magnet to draw the two major parties back to sanity because the people would be told the truth. Truth is the most powerful force in the world. It brings down empires.

In conclusion, it's important to understand that the third-party that AFR is proposing is not a "conventional" third-party. It is a reincarnation of Sam Adams and John Hancock's Old South Meeting House. It is a reincarnation of the Sons of Liberty. It will be a million-man army of patriots to take the Ron Paul revolution to the next level. And it will bring in tens of millions of dollars annually to further the cause. That's a powerful lot of persuasion.

-----------------------

Nelson Hultberg is a freelance writer in Dallas, Texas and the Director of Americans for a Free Republic www.afr.org. His articles have appeared in such publications as the Dallas Morning News, The American Conservative, Insight, The Freeman, and Liberty, as well as on numerous Internet sites such as The Daily Bell, Financial Sense, and Safe Haven. He is also the author of a soon to be released book on political philosophy, The Golden Mean: Libertarian Politics, Conservative Values. Email him at: nelshultberg@aol.com

No matter how much we all want that, Dr. Paul is still way wiser than me.

In this week alone, he spoke in two interviews. One was about him getting, and taking the advice of McDonald. The result being, why Ron is in the Republican party.

The other is the radio interview where Colmes asks about third party. Dr. Paul states, not yet because the two parties make the rules.

I'm not going to doubt this guy with all this experience.

* * *

There is a big division between those Libertarians who are agreeing with Ron Paul that the battle is in the Republican party and those that do not want to do this.

Except for the delegate states, the non-party-battlers are in the majority. My comment is this. Those who do not want to work the Repub party cite that they do not want to have to deal with the lying, corruption, and any other description one wants to use. I consider this like the way the Revolutionary War Militia was described in many instances. That as soon as the Redcoats lined up for battle, the militia ran from the field.

The moral is, the bad guys have control and if we want control, we are going to have to face the bad guys and all that descriptive behavior. It is inevitable. Feeling warm and cozy in the Libertarian or third party isn’t going to avoid the conflict.

It possibly is just wasting more time avoiding, then heading into the battle that is present right now, and has others already in it.

Pay now or pay later. But paying the price is going to have to happen either way.

Once again... 25 people at my Libertarian state convention. Contrary to the Holywood perversion of the meaning of Alice in Wonderland, Alice is famous for saying to the Queen of Hearts: "We must not believe in impossible things."

Reality matters. Reality is, the 3rd party will Not not not happen until we have taken over and dismantled at least one of the 2 major parties.

We are nearly there. My reorganizing meeting tonight is likley going to end with a new chairman and treasurer who are in the Ron Paul camp. We have 46% of the PCO slots, and are working to fill the other 16 with RP people. This is happening everywhere.

If there's going to be a 3rd party, its going to have to be the Neocon dinosaurs who have to start it when we take their over from inside.

Quit trying to cling to the impossible and come join the resistance. We are all Individualists, the party name is irrelivant and to cling to ridiculous symantics is exactly what they want because it divides us. Join us in showing the Neocons the door.

A third party will come out of nowhere filled with people whose #1 priority is to shift the tax burden away from the wealthy onto everyone else. This thread is a joke. We're lucky if we can sell limited government to the idiots in this country, trying to sell them on eliminating progressive taxation and framing it as the number one problem in America is a total waste of time. I think I'll stick with Ron's message and Rand's strategy until something better comes along.

Launching a third party is a horrible, horrible, money-wasting, futile idea.

The majority of those eligible to vote do not support either the Dems or the Reps. The only reason the Republican Party still exists is because both the Dems and the Reps have written themselves into elections laws in all 50 states.

I read a statistic somewhere online that Obummer received votes from 23% of those adults eligible to vote. Romneycare got something like 21% or some such. Less than half of those eligible chose to vote "major party."

In terms of engagement and performance, the Dems and Reps are already minor parties. The only thing propping them up and keeping them alive is inertia and the fact that they have rigged ballot access laws to the benefit of the two-party cabal. That's how much of an advantage they've given themselves.

If you cannot defeat the ballot access laws (and you cannot) then the only hope to be competitive is to take over one or both of the two legal entities that have given themselves special privileges.

A political party is a corporate fiction--meaning, it's a set of bylaws and some incorporation papers. It has a perpetual life. It's a shell...and if we fill up that shell with liberty lovers, we win. We get in the debates, we get covered on the news.

Please, please do not waste time on yet another third party. Focus on taking over one or both of the only two entities who have a snowball's chance in Hell of being competitive.

If you were sent a "statement" every year detailing how much was needed for this and that "service" or function of government and then said statement outlined "your fair share" if you wanted to pay it, that would be the only proper system.(I'd love to see a big government type argue away from that one!)

You pay for what you want, not for what you don't. Of course, you don't receive anything you don't pay for. You also can't be forced to pay for something you have no option not to use or benefit from, that someone else decided to provide or build. (this is the part they won't accept because they don't want to pay for it at all. They want everyone ELSE to.)

THAT would cut down tremendously if not eliminate entirely everything that wasn't essential to "secure these rights" as the Declaration of Independence notes as the ONLY function and purpose of government.

Here are two things to remember. The young voters both in 2008 and again in 2012 voted overwhelmingly for Obama. This an example of the mentality of some of our high school graduates today. 25% have been found to be functionally illiterate.To say that they have been dumbed down would be an under statement.Colleges have reported they have to retrain some of those who entering college in the basics they should have been taught.Lowering grades so some students can pass is hurting and not helping these students.

All those who denounce a third-party approach and insist that working within the GOP is the only way to bring about reform have a serious flaw in their reasoning.

As I point out in the article, the progressive rate income tax system is what corrupts all new "reform Republicans" after they come to Washington. This is because the progressive rate system creates "infinite demand" for government services. All Congressmen (new and old) very quickly realize this. Thus all new "reform Republicans" eventually cross over the aisle to vote with the Democrats because they know if they don't, they will not be re-elected.

The only way to end this corruption is to end the progressive rate tax system so as to end "infinite demand" for government spending, which will end the necessity to cross over the aisle. But no "reform Republicans" are ever willing to vote to truly end progressive rates because they know they won't win re-election if they do. Thus they resign themselves to joining with the Democrats to increase spending every year. This has been going on for 50 years. All reformers get bought off by the system.

The only solution is to put a third-party candidate into the national TV presidential debates who understands this dilemma and is capable of explaining it to the 70 million voters who tune into the debates. He must be a candidate who doesn't care if he wins the White House. He wishes only to tell the truth to the people and sell them on the idea of eliminating the source of relentless government growth, which means eliminating progressive tax rates and eventually the income tax itself. This is why an Independent third-party candidate is so crucial to genuine reform of the system. He is the only kind of politician who will be willing to explain the truth to the voters.

This is why it does no good to work "within the GOP" to try and reform it. We must end the progressive rate system FIRST before we try and reform the GOP with new liberty minded congressmen. But ending the progressive tax system can only be done by an articulate Independent candidate who doesn't care if he loses the election. By getting into the national TV election debates, he can sell the voters on why they must truly abolish progressivity of rates and eventually the income tax itself. He can tell the truth to the American people, which no Republican can do.

I worked with Ralph Nader in opening debates and ballots to Indy's and third parties. Nader has never belonged to a political party. I registered Decline to Statre Party in 1993. I worked in two states and with many third parties, and I am convinced what we did was exercize the system so they could black every possible route for an Indy or Third Party to bust through. Ron Paul's campaign was a cake walk by comparison.

I'm new to the GOP. I never belonged to a major party before, and have found the GOP to be nothing as I imagined it would be.

I absolutely know reform can happen in the GOP.

With that, I wish you the best of luck.. I certainly won't hender your progress.. as a Republican, I believe we should have more open debates and ballots for Indy's and third parties. You are going to see the GOP change. and that is going to be the reflection of those like me who are reforming the GOP by joining, participating with the goal of establishing Ron Paul's message.

...."And don’t think it was—as the media has suggested— just a reckless misstep by Newt Gingrich when he criticized the Medicare reform package of Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) saying, “I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”
The truth is that Gingrich’s rhetoric—attacking both the right and the left in the same breath—was deliberate. He was clearly portraying himself as one of the centrist advocates of American exceptionalism, echoed by other recent comments by Gingrich proudly recalling his many years as a Rockefeller Republican.
Don’t be surprised—you heard it here first—that if he fails to win the GOP presidential nomination, Gingrich will be part of a breakaway centrist third party movement which has been conjured up at the highest levels of the establishment elite"....http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/american_exceptionalis...

shake up the Demopublican system and end its despotic grip on our lives, then he needs to get into the national TV presidential debates like Ross Perot did in 1992 where he can stand on that stage and tell 70 million American voters how the Demopublican candidates are destroying the country via the income tax and the Federal Reserve."

The Commission on Presidential Debates WON"T let that happen - BUT Christina Tobin's Free and Equal Election Foundation - which hosted two "open" debates this year, the first of which was moderated by Larry King and between the two debates were broadcast on Free Speech TV, LinkTV, CSPAN, OraTV, RT, Al Jazeera and more, and also live streamed on a great number of alternative media sites (It was also trending in the top 10 on Twitter the 23rd and 24th of October) - has a very solid 3 point plan to produce debates in 2016 that rival the CPD's debate audience size. I'll keep you posted!

There are many OTHER bulldozers that require NO wrestling to "control." It's a million times easier to do that. All you need to do is show up and stay engaged in your local Constitution Party or Libertarian Party.

On the field with the two bulldozers, I think you are referring to a couple of clown cars which may or may not be present called the Constitution Party and Libertarian party.

One of the two bulldozers promptly bulldoze them each and every time they appear on the field.

Sometimes (particularly the LP) the clown car runs over itself. Have you ever actually been to an LP meeting? I have. You couldn't get them to move in a concerted direction if their LIVES depended on it. I loved everything they said, but it was the SINGLE LARGEST WASTE OF TIME IN MY ENTIRE LIFE. Utterly worthless. Why not just shovel hours of your life into the furnace. They will never, EVER ever get anything done ever other than debate each other.

I have been and I have related my experience. It is first hand observation. If I wanted to join a master debater society, I would join the LP and go to LP meetings.

If I wanted to move a political football downfield and score points, I would not. They would argue about the play for months and then not play as a team. Meanwhile their opponents would score over and over and over, while they debate amongst themselves.

So, explain what OUTCOMES the LP can achieve? Even if it increased its membership 10 or 100 fold? There's that fatal flaw still.

This last election should be a big wake up call for the Republican party. By rejecting the Ron Paul supporters and the core beliefs the Republicans one held important, like small government and fiscal responsibility, they lost. If they can't figure that out, they will probably lose the next election. Once they understand they can't win without the RP wing of the party, things will change, the only question is, how many elections are they prepared to lose? I'm with the Granger on this one, a third party won't work, we need to work within the Republican party. If they come around, support the liberty candidates we campaign and vote for them, if they don't, we sit out another election cycle.

what real change can there be? They won't give up their power to a bunch of do-gooders. Infiltration by do-gooder liberty folks could force them to show their cards. Like what happened in Tampa.
What we need is for the police and military to arrest these people. And public pressure to make the judges enforce the law.

Wow, I am stunned! I only joined them about 5 years ago, just so I could vote for Ron Paul in the 2008 NJ Primary, and I'm well over 50 years old, myself. So tell me Brother Winston, how long have you been an active, registered Republican?

—

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox

You got the wrong guy. I left the leftist, progressive republican party shortly after Ron Paul. I DETEST the leftist republican party and work to strengthen third parties. That's why I was THRILLED to see the Tea Party pop up... FINALLY (I thought)... A CHANCE TO FINALLY BREAK AWAY FROM THE R vs D SCAM!!!!!!!!! I still remember the first viral youtube clip:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6xWGvdRQ9Q

WOW!!!!!!!! An ORIGINAL TEA PARTIER explaining to the democrat/republican media "It's NOT democrats, it's not republicans, IT'S ALL OF 'EM!!!!!

Then... imagine my indescribable DISGUST, to see the DISEASED VAMPIRE leftist republican party slowly body snatch it, de-fang, de-claw and de-nut it. To see politically unsophisticated tea partiers CONSUMED by a republican SNAKE (that is NOT the Gadsden rattler).

BUT WAIT!!!!!!!
A miracle... the Liberty Movement sprang up!!!! YES!!!!!!! It SEES the Tea Party's been co-opted and the NON-CO-OPTED have evolved into something else! YES!!!!! THESE GUYS GET IT!!!!!!!!!!! F the R's!!!!!!!!!!

Then... (you guessed it) RIGHT ON SCHEDULE, the DISEASED VAMPIRE LEFTIST REPUBLICAN PARTY is currently trying to AGAIN... slowly body snatch it, de-fang, de-claw and de-nut it. The head vampire? NONE OTHER THAN RON PAUL'S FRIGGIN FRAGGIN FARGIN SON!!!!!!!!

If Ron Paul can't even get more than two million counted votes in the Republcan primaries, what makes you think a third party candidate running on Ron Paul's platform could garner the forty million votes necessary to win a three-way presidential race?
First, you've got to remember that a lot of those 2 mil votes Ron Paul would not have won if he had run as a third party candidate. Some of those votes came from partisan Republicans who were convinced to vote for Paul based on the direct mailings and ads.

All third party candidates combined this year got less than 2% of the vote. Despite what polls say, Americans are NOT dissatisfied, disenchanted, or fed up with the two-party system. The majority of Americans LIKE their party and the only way they'll vote for a Constitutional Conservative is if he/she runs in their party.

—

"The truth is that neither British nor American imperialism was or is idealistic. It has always been driven by economic or strategic interests." - Charlie Reese

1. With God, all things are possible. (this DOES NOT include "better evils")

2. The two "million votes" is based on a media blackout and smear campaigns, from a media losing credibility and strength by the hour.

3. "Liberty," NOT "republican" unites. 2012 proved this.

4. Polls indicate people ARE FED UP with the FRAUDULENT two party (one party) MONOPOLY.

The only legitimate road block, as you've articulated, are the Establishment REPUBLICANS. They will NEVER win another major election (BY DESIGN). So... seems to me the ball's in their court. Possible win with a third party, or GUARANTEED loss with leftist republican party.

previous infiltraition came from the Democratic Party, that still has claims to GOP seats.. And while some of us may be former Democratic Party members.. the goal is to reverse what the Democrats did.. so yes, this time it is different becaue this time is a whole new agenda with a different foundation.

Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer